1969 (2) TMI 168 - HC - VAT and Sales Tax

Summary

Issues:
Interpretation of the term 'meal' under Schedule I of the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958 and its applicability to the sale of food articles by an assessee.

Analysis:
The judgment pertains to a reference under section 44(1) of the Madhya Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1958, initiated by the Commissioner of Sales Tax regarding the interpretation of the term 'meal' in sub-item (b) of item 9 of Schedule I of the Act. The factual background involves an assessee, a cooperative society running a restaurant, selling various food articles to customers. The Sales Tax Officer initially assessed the turnover of sales of "meals" based on sales exceeding Rs. 2, which was later reduced by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner. Subsequently, the Sales Tax Tribunal held that the sale of individual or collective food articles did not constitute a sale of "a meal" but rather of cooked food exempt from tax under the Act.

The key legal provision under scrutiny is section 10(1) of the Act, which exempts the sales of goods specified in Schedule I under certain conditions. Item No. 9 of Schedule I exempts cooked food from tax, except for a meal exceeding Rs. 2 in charge. The central issue revolves around whether the sale of food articles by the assessee constitutes a "meal" as per the Act's provisions. Notably, the Act does not define the term 'meal', necessitating its interpretation based on common parlance and popular understanding. The court emphasized that a meal refers to food consumed at regular meal times like breakfast, dinner, or supper, distinct from mere snacks or preparations. Consequently, the sale of food articles by the assessee did not amount to the sale of a "meal" but rather of cooked food exempt from tax under Schedule I.

In conclusion, the court answered the first question by defining "meal" as regular mealtime food and determining that the food articles sold by the assessee did not constitute a meal. Therefore, the sale was not considered a sale of a meal under the Act. The second question was answered affirmatively, and the assessee was awarded costs for the reference, with the counsel's fee fixed at Rs. 100. The reference was resolved accordingly.